Not that I have any influence in the matter, but if I were allowed to "pick" which date I would want the X PRIZE would be won, I would be torn between two choices:

1. As soon as possible Benefits: A quick victory by Rutan would generate publicity soon. And when you think about the Mars landings, the Stardust mission, and the arrival of Cassini all happening in the next seven months - so that people are already paying attention to space - Rutan's feat would just dramatically increase public interest in space during this period. Plus, the publicity surrounding Rutan would help shape the debate about the future of NASA and the relationship of the government to the private sector in space. Imagine if the President announced a new space vision in the State of the Union, and the next day Rutan went into space! That would provoke some discussion.

2. As late as possible By this, I mean November or December. My rationale behind this is simple: the more the merrier. If the winning team does not fly until Nov or Dec, there would be at least two or three other teams hot on their heels. In fact, by late 2004 there ought to be at least 5 teams flying stuff: Rutan, Armadillo, da Vinci, Canadian Arrow, HARC...
The large number of teams would dramatically increase publicity surrounding the X PRIZE. There would be a lot more coverage of the X PRIZE if Rutan wasn't the only one flying.

So there's a dilemma: do you want a little publicity soon or a lot of publicity later?

The likely scenario is Rutan wins the XPRIZE in early 2004, maybe March/April timeframe. This of course changes to pressure on the other teams to produce a commercially viable spaceline. I started to say airline, but that's not accurate.

For suborbital Space flight to become part of the American or world consciousness, there needs to be regular media coverage or advertising. If it is just a onetime media story like the Chinese launch or SpaceShipOne's supersonic flight, Americans will forget, if they even hear it at all.

But if Paul Allen uses another small part of his billions of dollars to promote space flight thru the media outlets available to him, he will maximize the possibility of changing the world. Keep in mind that Allen is driven to change the world, like Microsoft changed the world by being instrumental in putting a computer on nearly every desk.

The other possibility to gain lots of media attention so that everyone believes in space flight, is that someone famous or number of famous people fly to space at a price that many could afford. Remember that the first passengers of commercial airline travel were actors, politicians. etc. Then the other viable teams would have to compete to attract passengers. If I had a vote, I say let's go early and often.

Of the many candidates, Lance Bass would be an interesting choice or maybe Paul Allen, himself.

Probably the best outcome to be hoped for, is that the publicity surrounding the winning of the X-prize would generate funding for follow-on x-prizes. Ideally, there would then be two paths for RLV developement.

1) The X-Cup which opens up the competition to Corporate Sponsorship ala NASCAR. Take say the first, second, & third teams to meet the X-prize criteria and make them X-Cup classes (or some such thing). Now allow the Boeings, Lockheed Martins, TRWs, etc to get involved in "extending" the innovating technical path trailblazed by the original X-prize team to their technical engineering limit.

2) X2 and follow-on prizes for significant additional access to space hurdles. Unlike option 1, this still allows brand-new innovation in vehicle design to take place, while at the same time allow Corporate Sponsored deriviates of the original X1 designs to also compete.

I think the one of the hooks in the X-prize concept is the championing of the little guy. It's Jeff Gordon who wins the race driving a Dupont sponsored vehicle; not Dupont who wins and just happens to have a driver named Jeff Gordon.

Of the many candidates, Lance Bass would be an interesting choice or maybe Paul Allen, himself.

or tom hanks. people know of lance bass and paul allen, but they just don't have the same amount of prestige with the masses that he does. with the exception of really really big/controversial people like bill gates and martha stewart, entertainment celebrities are more famous than economic celebrities. i say tom hanks should fly with the team that wins soon after they win, unless scaled doesn't want to offer rides to anyone other than their own people, in which case he should fly on the first commercial flight offered by whatever team provided their vehicle is safe enough.

A very appropriate choice. He could surpass his pretend spaceflight in the wonderful movie Apollo 13 with an even more wonderful and real spaceflight on a private vehicle! That would be cool. Plus, Tom Hanks is a known space enthusiast...

The efforts of entrepreneurs are also seen in the battle to save Russia’s Mir space station. Mir went into operation in 1986. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, President Bush decided that a good peace gesture would be an astronaut-cosmonaut exchange program with Americans living on Mir. During the 1990s, with Americans onboard, Mir acquired the reputation of an accident-prone orbiting antique. There were indeed problems with the station, in part because Russia was out of money and trying to dig out of the ruins of socialism.

The Russians had decided to scuttle Mir and to accept NASA’s invitation to become a partner in the International Space Station (ISS). But then private parties came to the rescue in the form of MirCorp, a company 40 percent owned by private Western investors and 60 percent owned by Energia, the Russian rocket and hardware manufacturer, which is over two-thirds privately owned. It planned to make Mir financially self-supporting.

As MirCorp CEO Jeffrey Manber said, ‘‘There is nothing wrong with Mir that a little money can’t fix.’’ Mir would be a platform for commercial activities such as in-orbit advertising, satellite construction and repair, recreation, and telecommunications services. Mir-Corp footed the bill for the first privately funded manned space flight—a resupply mission in 2000 to Mir. American Dennis Tito planned to pay MirCorp a reported $20 million so he could be the first private passenger in orbit. Mark Burnett, producer of the hit television program Survivor, had an agreement with MirCorp to allow contestants to train and compete at Russia’s Star City. The winner would go on a 10-day mission to Mir.But behind the scenes top NASA officials pressured Energia to abandon Mir, threatening to cut Energia out of the ISS contract. Those officials claimed that if Energia continued to provide services to Mir, the Russian company would not have enough resources to meet commitments to the ISS. This was not true. Several Russian ‘‘Progress’’ supply rockets were sitting unused. MirCorp wanted to purchase them to support Mir. The money would have been used to build more rockets. But under a treaty with the Russian government NASA had the final say on the rockets, and it said ‘‘No.’’

MirCorp also wanted to import from the United States a tether that would have provided power to Mir, thus reducing the need for resupply rockets and saving the space station. But the U.S. State Department, reportedly under pressure from NASA, delayed the export license for 10 months, until after Russia decided to bring down the Mir.

In the end, Mir was de-orbited. It burned up in the atmosphere in March 2001. MirCorp struggled heroically to convert a money-losing relic into a private, moneymaking success. Its tragic failure was due in part to NASA officials who seemed more comfortable with a Soviet space model than a free market one. But MirCorp now plans to place in orbit a module for human occupation at a cost of about $150 million.

Although the rest of the article may be valid, I was suprised by this statement. Anyone who has read the book Dragonfly knows what I am talking about. I especially remember one anecdote where the cosmonauts ask ground control what a certain cable does -- and no one knows! No records, no knowledge...

Although the rest of the article may be valid, I was suprised by this statement. Anyone who has read the book Dragonfly knows what I am talking about. I especially remember one anecdote where the cosmonauts ask ground control what a certain cable does -- and no one knows! No records, no knowledge...

Mircorp was prepared to invest millions in retrofitting Mir station with technology of this century. Certainly replacement of an undocumented cable designed back in the 1960's would be insignificant. This is called an upgrade and rapidly occurs in nearly every industry not run by government bureaucrats.

Mircorp's first customer was Dennis Tito. Plus they could reasonably expect substantial corporate advertising revenue, such as Radio Shack, Sony and others. Check out their website. www.mir-corp.com

The point is that private orbital space operations were setback more than 10 years, by NASA. If you add up the damage in terms of lost asset (Mir), lost revenue opportunity ($ 10's of millions), especially the loss of the public recognition that private companies could accomplish in space, what government agencies could not (rebuild Mir and maintain it thru another lifetime). That is what NASA could not afford to let happen. So, NASA destroyed Mir to save its bureaucracy.

Would a private Mir be on weekly television (a Reality/Game Show or maybe an episode of Fear Factor) and be changing the world's public perception of space operations, if not for NASA?Да, Yes, Si, Oui. In any language, that was an unconscionable waste and a shame of epic proportions for NASA.

On a positive note, NASA has not killed the ideas or Mircorp plus the XPRIZE is doing its job very well. Private space operations will be a reality in 2004. A truly Happy New Year!